Historical import records show there are about 21M firearms in the country. After 10 years and repeated amnesty announcements, the government only managed to get about 1/2 of the long guns registered. Our feds fudged the numbers to make it look like they had compliance but we knew better. Most people registered one (to take hunting) and left the others unregistered. Some flat-out and publicly refused. One WWII vet carried an unregistered rifle to the steps of the legislature in Edmonton and was arrested.

The real evil in it was that it gave Big Police a clump of catch-all criminal charges that they would use if all else failed; e.g., when a search warrant came up empty there would be some b.s. firearms charge.

Gun owners finally started to speak up and to organize. Our gun owner organizations finally stopped trying to be liked and started getting blunt - not quite like the GOA or NRA or JFPO, but not bad. We elected a Conservative government (like your democrats, really) and they revoked our long gun registry, as promised during the election. There remains much that needs to be revoked - and was promised in those same elections.

Anyway, enough people finally stood up and spoke up. Some were police officers. Some were professors. Some were doctors. Most were just ordinary folks who were fed up. It took all the usual stuff - petitions, letter campaigns, committee hearings, etc.

It was real hard to kill. I hope you never go down that dead end.

The lady who spearheaded that tyranny in Canada was Wendy Cukier. She was one of the founding members of IANSA. IANSA is behind the U.N. Small Arms Treaty. It's important to know who is coming over the wall.

We need some sort of organization that can pull together the correlation of all these stats from the US Canada UK and Australia. They are all the same.

If you mean the opponents are the same, there's truth in that. When IANSA formed to gather and co-ordinate and form hundreds of NGO's that were anti-gun and anti-male, we were immediately outnumbered and out-manoeuvered.

I know the NRA is limited to U.S. territory but I thought I read something in a recent email where they were joining some international umbrella organization that was pro-gun? Such an organization would be a good thing, IMO.

There is not a shred of doubt that we are right and they are wrong but it would still seem to be a good idea to meet fire with fire.

Meantime, this is as good a site for an international perspective. It is historical, of course, rather than current, but useful nonetheless because it seems we are always confronted with bogus claims that "In x country, blah, blah and they have lower crime":

Lastly, here's an example of why I agree that it's important for us to also co-ordinate internationally. It could not hurt if we knew more about what went on here before the current round of U.N. meetings:

I expect the reason there is no international movement is money. The American NRA is condemned for asking for funds to fight our own battles. The cost to fight our antigun moves cost staggering amounts of money.
Based on the lack of interest in Canada and other nations to develop their own "Push Back" organizations I doubt support for very much. Your own NRA stays out of the gun debate and has very little support in Canada. Each nation should first build a strong NRA for all of us to cooperate with. We are locked into constant battles. The last thing we need is to try to fight a world war.

I have donated $100 this year to the N.R.A. - over and above my membership dues. I don't see or hear any condemnation about that. I've donated more than that in Canada, btw.

There is no NRA in Canada. We have two national organizations but that is not their name.

The opponent is organized internationally. That is a fact. They are now entrenched in the U.N. and organizing an international treaty. They are also active within countries. Those are also facts.

There is no doubt that the NRA needs to focus only on the U.S. Same goes for our organizations. But that does not mean that those, and similar organizations in other countries, cannot also form some kind of umbrella organization to share intel and co-ordinate some pro-gun efforts. Those things are not mutually exclusive, IMO.

There is an international "war" going on right now. Choosing to ignore it or not show up will not change that one iota. It is what it is.

Climbing a tree will buy peace only until they get around to your tree.

__________________
C.S.S.A.; N.F.A.; N.R.A. Life Member
Make the world a better place; have your liberal spayed or neutered.

I'm not sure that's true. I've chatted here and there with some upstanding folks in Australia and South Africa. On the other hand, I've never run into a Swiss or Norwegian or ? pro-gun group but they must exist. It couldn't hurt to pick their brains and, as you say, share intel. I do not have a shred of doubt that our opponents have been doing that for years....since the 90's. They should not be allowed to beetle away in the shadows any longer.

I believe that more would stand up if they knew they were not alone. Why? Because truth and good ideas are contagious if given 1/2 a chance.

It is valid, IMO, to link these international gun control zealots to the New World Order people....the ones who want one world government. These are determined, well-funded groups and should not be underestimated.

In the final analysis, it's not really about guns, is it? Guns are important enough - for many reasons - but liberty is everything. That's why I donate to the N.R.A. They can't help me with gun issues in Alberta, but they can indirectly help to assure my children, and their children, don't become serfs.

__________________
C.S.S.A.; N.F.A.; N.R.A. Life Member
Make the world a better place; have your liberal spayed or neutered.

I use NRA as a reference point. You are correct you have never developed an NRA as Americans have. It is nice you have donated $100 bucks to our NRA. It takes much more than money to win the gun wars. NRA members are active Insts. political involvement etc.
Our organization dates back over 130 years to protect our Constitutional rights. Canadians should model a strong pro gun NRA as we have in the U.S. Why are you not working to create a strong pro gun Org. in your country?

I use NRA as a reference point. You are correct you have never developed an NRA as Americans have. It is nice you have donated $100 bucks to our NRA. It takes much more than money to win the gun wars. NRA members are active Insts. political involvement etc.
Our organization dates back over 130 years to protect our Constitutional rights. Canadians should model a strong pro gun NRA as we have in the U.S. Why are you not working to create a strong pro gun Org. in your country?

Good question. Part of the answer these days is that the C.S.S.A. and N.F.A. have (finally) shifted from trying to be inoffensive to speaking up more directly. I think if they had not done so, another organization would have formed. The fact that they occupy those platforms also makes it more difficult to start another one.....remember that our population is about the same as CA. How many organizations can be supported?

We are also different in that our country has been soaked in anti-gun propaganda for decades. Our liberal courts have denied any constitutional right to keep or bear arms (wrongly, IMO). We have a demented anti-gun culture among the justice system, especially in the east where most of the population is. Recently, a fellow in Ontario was prosecuted for firing warning shots at three men who were fire-bombing his house - with him in it.

We used to have national shooting orgs but they were dismantled many years ago and never morphed into a pro-gun organization like the NRA did, unfortunately.

If it were up to me, we'd have something modelled after the GOA. Most politicians only understand, or respond to, confrontational politics. I think the GOA model would fit us better since we have no clearly expressed right to keep or bear arms in our written constitution.

Maybe one day....

__________________
C.S.S.A.; N.F.A.; N.R.A. Life Member
Make the world a better place; have your liberal spayed or neutered.